Jawahar Lal Kant v. The State of Bihar

respondents after serving a copy thereof upon learned counsel for the petitioner in Court.

2. Heard learned counsel for the petitioner and learned counsel for respondent-State of Bihar and its authorities.

3. This writ petition has been filed by the petitioner for directing the respondents to pay the amount deducted from his salary with cost and penal interest.

4. The fact of the case is that the petitioner was an Assistant in Sub-Divisional Office at Dumrao and in the year 2001-02 he was given advance of Rs.65,153.00 for distributing amongst labourers. Without any proceeding or enquiry, an order Patna High Court CWJC No.12108 of 2005 (7) dt.21-02-2013 was suddenly passed by the District Magistrate, Buxar on

30.03.2003 (Annexure 1) directing the petitioner to return the advance money within a week, failing which, the amount shall be deducted from his salary and first information report shall be lodged. When the petitioner’s appeal against the said order was rejected, he moved this Court vide C.W.J.C.No. 6283 of 2004 and since the impugned order of the District Magistrate dated

30.03.2002 was passed without any proceeding/enquiry or show cause etc. a Bench of this Court found that the procedure adopted by the said authority was quite unknown to law and, accordingly, vide order dated 12.01.2005 (Annexure 2), the said order was quashed and the writ petition was allowed with observation that the authorities would proceed in the matter in accordance with law.

5. It transpires that even after the aforesaid order of the High Court, the authorities concerned did not proceed in the matter at all for about seven years till the petitioner retired on

13.09.2012. Even the application filed by the petitioner dated

12.02.2005, which was received by the authorities on 14.02.2005, remained unheeded. However, inspite of the aforesaid facts, the amount of Rs.65,153.00 deducted from the salary of the petitioner during the pendency of the writ petition was not returned. In the Patna High Court CWJC No.12108 of 2005 (7) dt.21-02-2013 said circumstances, it is quite apparent that respondent-authorities were duty bound to return the said money recovered from the salary of the petitioner because for so many years the petitioner was deprived of the said amount and the interest, which could have accrued had it been deposited in the Bank.

6. Although this writ petition was filed on 05.09.2005 after serving copies thereof upon learned counsel for the respondents, but no counter affidavit was filed for seven years and finally after repeated orders of this Court a counter affidavit has been filed on behalf of respondent no.3 on 12.02.2013, in which it is stated that the District Magistrate has written letter dated

30.01.2013 to the Principal Secretary, General Administration Department, Government of Bihar for permission to commence a departmental proceeding under Rule 43(b) of the Bihar Pension Rules and sought guidance in view of the order of the High Court.

7. From the arguments of learned counsel for the parties and the materials on record, it is quite apparent that there was a gross error and serious misuse of the authority by the District Magistrate, Buxar, who had passed order dated

30.03.2002. Although he was an I.A.S. officer and was expected to know the procedure prescribed and the principles involved for such action, but inspite of that he passed a whimsical order, which Patna High Court CWJC No.12108 of 2005 (7) dt.21-02-2013 had to be quashed by a Bench of this Court. This was a serious matter and the higher authorities of the Department should have taken note of it and should have also taken steps in that regard against the officers passing such orders, but inspite of that they are trying to defend such illegalities and that too by depriving the poor petitioner of his well earned salary, the source of livelihood of his family by way of deductions of a huge amount of more than Rs.65,000.00 on the basis of such illegal and whimsical order.

8. Furthermore, considering the said facts and circumstances, the authorities did not proceed in the matter even after this Court, vide order dated 12.01.2005, permitted them to proceed obviously because the authorities were fully aware that there was no occasion at all for initiating such a proceeding against the petitioner nor there was any material on record to show any laxity of the petitioner.

9. However, at the fag end when this case is being finally disposed of after about 8 years of its pendency, the respondents have come up with a frivolous plea that the District Magistrate had written to the Department on 30.01.2013 seeking permission to commence a fresh departmental proceeding against the petitioner and sought guidelines in the said matter. This exercise is nothing but to deviate the Court from the real issue Patna High Court CWJC No.12108 of 2005 (7) dt.21-02-2013 involved in this writ petition.

10. In the said circumstances, this writ petition is allowed and the District Magistrate, Buxar is directed to pay to the petitioner Rs.65,153.00, which has been deducted from his salary in view of the final order of the erstwhile District Magistrate of Buxar dated 30.03.2002. The said amount must be paid to the petitioner within two months from the date of receipt/production of a copy of this order along with interest at the rate of 10% per annum from the date of deduction of the said amount from the salary of the petitioner till the date of the payment of the said amount to him. (S.N. Hussain, J) MPS/-